Is it better to have loved and lost ...?

[hrj]

Is it worse to have enjoyed a golden summer of possibility only to be kicked in the teeth and sent back to the back of the bus? Yeah, I'm bitter. Bitter about vote numbers that are an order of magnitude better than the last time my potential right to marry came up on the ballot. But this time they're taking some thing away, not simply moving the goal line out farther. Oh, sure, I'd feel a lot worse if Prop 8 had been defeated but McCain had been elected. Don't interrupt my bitterness with rationality. My current fantasies are all turned towards the scenario where the state supremes say, "Ok, we told you that you couldn't treat same-sex and opposite-sex couples differently with respect to marriage. You want to take away some people's marriages? You have to take away everybody's marriages." None of this pussyfooting around about constitutional conventions and whatnot. Just a flat-out ruling that "equal protection" still means something.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go join a political protest in SF. (I'll be a little late arriving, but I moved my workout to after work so I could sleep in after going down to scotica's place for an election-watching party last night. One still needs one's priorities.)

Comments

[mdlbear]

I'm really hoping they'll at least mention that option along the way to blowing it away.

[blaurentnv.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, since this was a constitutional amendment, I think your fantasy is just that. This is going to be much harder to overturn than the last one.

At least the Attorney General has stated that he will defend the marriages that have already taken place.

Condolences; I'm feeling that I should have done more. Bigger donation? Made phone calls of support? Neither of those are easy for me, but this was a wrong/right (=yes/no) initiative.

[scotica.livejournal.com]

Except that all this amendment does is define "marriage" as between a man and a woman. It does _not_ require California to have civil "marriage" -- and the previous ruling said in so many words that the institution (for lack of a better word) didn't have to be called "marriage", but that, whatever it was called, it had to be the same (and called the same) for everyone.

If the case were heard by the same set of judges as last time, I think there is a good chance that they would say "Okay, civil unions for all, then, because the rest of the constitution is still there and all you did was define the word 'marriage'".

But I don't know that the same judges would be involved, and also I think it depends on what the lawsuits that are filed say.

It seems from what I am reading that the lawsuits are starting with the argument that you can't amend the constitution to take away fundamental rights, or at least that in order to do so you need more than a simple majority vote proposition (I read something about 2/3 vote by legislature and governor's signature to put it on the ballot). That is, they seem to be trying to get the amendment declared fundamentally unconstitutional. If that is the suit and argument, I don't know if the judges can or would declare that (if they didn't declare it unconstitutional altogether) "Oh, and by the way, 'marriage' is now illegal for everyone in California."

I don't know if this tactic/strategy is because they want same sex marriage as "marriage" if they can get it, and are holding the civil unions for all argument in reserve in case it doesn't work, or what.

In any case, despite Obama's victory, which is indeed a great load off my mind and gives me hope about so many things, I find myself very down today. The passage of Prop 8 has me angry and frustrated and disappointed for so many reasons and on so many levels, that I find I am just not much in a celebratory mood.

[blaurentnv.livejournal.com]

In response to your final paragraph, I'm in complete agreement. Tuesday morning, I said I'd be happy if only 2 votes went my way: Obama and no on 8. My e-mail has been filled with delighted messages, except from the Human Rights Campaign.

I wish I'd known about the protest / vigil in Sacramento earlier in the evening. San Francisco was just too far from here.

Discrimination does not belong in the Constitution of MY state!

[xrian.livejournal.com]

I doubt I need to tell you that I'm shocked and sorry, but I'm saying it anyway. I believe that change is coming, but it's far too slow and in the process a lot of people's lives get devastated.

Someday this will all look as bizarre as the idea of discriminating against someone who happens to be left-handed. That, too, took generations, and it shouldn't have.

[wulfsdottir.livejournal.com]

I take small hope in the fact that the numbers are better, but that certainly doesn't help now, and it's understandable that you would feel bitter about it.

{{hugs}}

I wish I could offer more than a pledge to vote against any such measures that arise here, and to continue to tell those who spout bigotry that I do not welcome their poison in my life.

sad, but still hopefull

[lapioggia.livejournal.com]

I agree that the Supremes will kick this to the curb, but it is sad that there are so many misguided people in my home state.

And I know it's probably hard to hear someone who has the rights you don't say to be patient, but really when you look at how very far things have progressed just in our lifetimes on this issue, I believe that it will come with a little more time.

We just elected a black man named Barack Hussein Obama to the presidency of the United States!!! I never thought I would see something like that in my lifetime. And if the world has come that far, we can surely make Marriage Equality happen too.

[herveus.livejournal.com]

I'm quite bummed by the results on Prop 8. I'm really frosted by the lengths that outside forces felt they had to go to to scare people into voting yes -- the lies, the misrepresentations, the manifest insecurity. There are a bunch of people who ought to be avoiding mirrors, lest they have to look themselves in the eye.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

Sometimes these things just take much longer than one would like. :(

Here in the UK it's taken 40 years to move from homosexuality being actually illegal to a point where civil partnerships between same-sex couples not only exist but are becoming accepted. We still have a long way to go and there's still a lot of prejudice out there, but I am constantly amazed and delighted at how far we've come.

Unfortunately you have the religious right to contend with. Good luck with the protest.

[hudebnik.livejournal.com]

Another sympathetic voice, from a state that hasn't yet legalized same-sex marriages (although we came close a few years ago; I don't know what the exact status is now).

If the case were heard by the same set of judges as last time, I think there is a good chance that they would say "Okay, civil unions for all, then, because the rest of the constitution is still there and all you did was define the word 'marriage'".

Which would be fine with me. I had more to say on the subject, but decided to put it here instead.

[gunnora.livejournal.com]

I saw this result and cried. Damaris and I live in Texas, which is about as far in the "social conservatism" basket as you can get. If change will ever come HERE, it has to be everywhere else first.

I get so mad at the bigots. Marriage is an economic contract historically. And anyone who has been through the painful, expensive process of having a same sex partner and trying to get all the legal protections a heterosexual couple gets with their marriage license understands that economic basis.

I had to get a lawyer and set up powers of attorney, health care powers of attorney, trusts, survivorship agreements, wills, and OMIGAWD the mortgage and car loan details to make sure we were equal co-owners and that if one of us died the other would correctly get everything. Life insurance. Health insurance -- which actually I can't offer for Damaris, but she can get for me. Etc. etc. ad nauseam.

You'd think the social conservatives would be GLAD to have gay marriages. Why, if I am safely married, I am not out chasing YOUR DAUGHTER NOW AM I? Oh wait. That's the same social conservatives who are shagging women not their wives, but it's A-OK because they REPENT and, after all, Tab A went into Slot B as Gawd Intended.

/sigh

[mbumby.livejournal.com]

I was so sorry -- and angry (not at any one person, just at the INJUSTICE of it all) -- to hear about Prop 8. As angry as I was when my state did the wrong thing a few years back.